Smoking Tobacco Cigarettes CAUSES Cancer?

WHY NOT have graphic labels for GMOs showing how GMOs [are actually proven to] CAUSE CANCER, illness, obesity, sterility, death, and NEW health disorders? I have yet to see a single peer-reviewed report of a REAL study proving that smoking tobacco causes cancer... in fact the most dangerous chemicals in cigarettes are ADDED when the plants are watered with the same water WE drink from our taps. The most carcinogenic part of tobacco is actually the fact that the crop is IRRADIATED WITH NUCLEAR RADIATION - but the 'anti-smoking' groups cannot tell you this because all of the lettuce we eat and most of our produce is also irradiated!

People have smoked tobacco in Africa for hundreds of years - BUT lung cancer was never a problem (hardly even reported) UNTIL the British colonized and industrialized Africa. Occurences of lung cancer came immediately after DEISEL FUEL EXHAUST was introduced into their environment. In fact, the reason WHY there aren't many full-service gas stations left is because the attendants started being commonly diagnosed with lung cancer FROM the DEISEL FUEL EXHAUST.

People smoked in Africa for thousands of years but never got lung cancer until the British industrialized them (full-service gas stations closed because ALL the attendants got lung cancer FROM breathing diesel exhaust)... SMALL PARTICLES CAUSE CANCER (mold, radiation) - smoke is NOT small enough...

Cigarettes ‎"COULD exacerbate"... don't worry it's not depleted uranium, nor mercury fumes from generating electricity by burning fossil fuels, it's not the vaccines nor petrochemical pharmaceuticals, it's not your fluoridated water, nor petrochemical foods causing "NEW allergies" sold by GMO brokers... you've found the culprit... it must be... it has to be... and COULD only be... those damned cigarette smokers...

Hitler's Nazi Anti-Smoking Campaigns

You know who was the first jerk (smoker) to publicly attack smokers? Simply because he didn't like smoke and he wanted them to give up their freedom so he could be selfishly happy... Adolph Hitler hated smokers first; he taught many fools how to bigot and hate their neighbors. Let's pretend for just a minute that the nazi inspired smoker-bashing campaigns (started by Hitler) genuinely care about health - rather than just bigoting people whom they dislike purely based upon their habits and opinions...

The first modern attempt at restricting smoking was imposed by the then German government in every university, post office, military hospital, and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from Adolf Hitler. Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.

Adolf Hitler was a heavy smoker in his early life (he used to smoke 25 to 40 cigarettes daily) but gave up the habit, concluding that it was a waste of money. Adolf Hitler's personal distaste for tobacco and the Nazi reproductive policies were among the motivating factors behind their campaign against smoking, and this campaign was associated with both antisemitism and racism.

Mandatory FDA Food Irradiation

IF you REALLY wanted to convince someone that smoking tobacco causes cancer... WHY NOT just tell them it contains nuclear radiation? which we know causes cancer... WHY NOT tell people that all tobacco is IRRADIATED?!? BECAUSE all our spinach & lettuce is mandatory irradiated by the FDA... ironically radiation is **SOLD** as 1 of the only 2 rockefeller-patented treatments.

Fake Cancer Donation Centers

Now let's pretend for just a minute that the cancer institutes are really trying to find a cure for a disease that profits them about $50k per patient in the last 5 years while they're murdered with rockefeller-patented chemotherapy... this is their response when presented with a working cure with dozens of terminally-ill patients reversed: "THE [CANADIAN CANCER] SOCIETY DOES NOT ENDORSE OR SUPPORT MEDICAL PRODUCTS OR DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS... THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION. GOOD LUCK IN YOUR WORK."

Scientific Experiments With Control Tests

I've spent hours researching this topic and have never found a single peer-reviewed report of a REAL study proving that smoking tobacco causes cancer. This experiment is as simple as putting rats in 2 separate cages, and blowing smoke into one of them - IF cigarette smoke DOES cause cancer = the rats in the smoke-filled chamber will develop cancerous tumors, while the rats in the control cage would NOT. So after all the money THEY spend telling us that smoking causes cancer - WHY NOT spend $100 on some rats and a pack of smokes to PROVE it? Until THEY do, this is just a load of propaganda to defer the responsibility and cost of the INDUSTRIAL SMOKESTACKS that THEY scrape for sodium fluoride to add to our public water supply (which does indeed cause osteoporosis and bone cancer in boys).

"Research also SUGGESTS that"... how stupid do you think people are?

"Research also SUGGESTS that secondhand smoke MAY increase the RISK" this is what you think is "science"? i call that legalese = a way for lawyers to deceptively manipulate words so naive people cannot differentiate between fact and fiction. "MAY increase the RISK of heart disease", "secondhand smoke is THOUGHT to cause about", "Secondhand smoke is ASSOCIATED with disease and premature death", "There MAY also be a LINK between exposure to secondhand smoke and the RISK of stroke", "CAN cause them to cough", "smoke CAN be harmful", etc...

2 cages of rats, you blow smoke on half of them, which get cancer, and the control rats don't... they can spend a fortune on propaganda, lies, and half-truths... but cannot perform a simple scientific test...

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2006.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2010.

Unrelated Carcinogenic Associations Rather Than FACTS

"69 chemicals in secondhand smoke" right... cadmium, arsenic, lead, mercury ALL ADDED BY CITIES TO THE TAP WATER used to water the plants... cite one single peer-reviewed study showing that second-hand smoke CAUSES CANCER... We're not dumb enough for you to fool with "i found a chemical in cigarettes that independently tests as a carcinogen but we cannot produce a simple test with rats in 2 cages showing that inhaling smoke causes cancer".

Cancer: Carcinogenic Causes vs. Cures

Your cancer risk = 1 in 3 women get diagnosed with cancer, and 1 in 2 men get diagnosed with cancer. 1 out of every 4 people will die from cancer!

Most forms of cancer are preventable; we MUST study possible carcinogenic contaminants and remove them from our society. Radiation from nuclear bombs, depleted uranium warfare, and nuclear "tests" has contaminated our air and nearby soil. If the DU situation is NOT cleaned up soon - the entire human race may lose our ability to reproduce; depleted uranium is a death sentence.

There are many other hazardous waste products dumped into our environment. Sodium fluoride, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury are even ADDED DIRECTLY to American public drinking water (hexafluorosilicic acid) + plus it's in the moisture content in our food and water makes up 70% of the human body. Mercury from coal-burning plants is in our water and in ALL of the fish at alarming levels.

The pills they feed us to deal with sympotoms from these pollutants are hurting us more than helping us - and there are reports stating that more children are maimed and DIE from vaccines than occurances of the diseases they're meant to prevent.

Most of American food has been genetically modified (GMO Food) and has the possibility to morph since the DNA has already been severely disrupted and altered. Our corn, soy products, cotton, sugar beets, and much more are almost all GMO crops. Their built-in resistance to poisonous pesticides like Roundup also affects their edibility and digestability. They fertilize GMOs with phosphate fertilizer made from petroleum OIL because the soil is often dead from all the pesticides. Even the alfalfa used as fodder to feed livestock is GMO food, which is also lacking in nutrients. Then they shoot the cows with posilac (rBGH/rBST) and that ends up in the milk - along with the pus from the mastitis they get from the shots, and the anti-biotics they use to keep these sick cows alive long enough to make a profit. Still wonder why GMOs are BANNED in Canada and the EU?

Transfats and MSG are also GMOs that are NOT digestable; these molecules used to prolong shelf-life, become blubber. The same is true about Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal), which is produced by feeding oil to e-coli bacteria that are genetically engineered (with a virus) to defacate ASSpartame (crap, feces). Aspartame also impairs thyroid function, and even as the principle ingredient in Diet Coke = it can make people FAT! This is precisely why Venezuela just BANNED Coke Zero.

Are there ALTERNATIVE "treatments" for Cancer ?

The medical and drug industries (in cooperation with the FDA) make too much money FROM cancer "treatments" (and donations to NGOs "not interested" in homeopathic remedies) to ADVERTISE any natural treatments they cannot directly regulate, nor patent and collect revenue from. There are a few ORGANIC compounds (which are NOT patented, nor patentable) that have been proven to reduce tumors (in laboratory animals and terminal cancer patients) by as much as 70% over just a few weeks.

Organic NON-PATENTABLE Cancer Treatments

Do your OWN INDEPENDENT research on these topics, and you will find thousands of articles written by international doctors and cancer SURVIVORS (so many that you'll likely find people who previously HAD the same types of cancer that you are researching). These are NON-PATENTABLE, which means no corrupt BiG-Pharma corporations can monopolize the procedure in order to raise the costs, maximize profitability and create scarcity - while restricting the availability, clinical use, hindering research, and technological advancement of these simple but highly-effective natural treatments.

Chemotherapy & Radiation treatments are a death sentence! The rate of death increases about 20% after each year of chemo. Surgery can successfully remove tumors - but can also spread the infection through bleeding. There are many NATURAL treatments for cancer such as vitamin B-17 that BiG Pharma is supressing because THEY make a fortune from TREATING cancer - NOT curing it! Cancer TREATMENT is a multi-billion dollar industry. THEY profit on average $50,000 per patient; and BiG Pharma would lose all that income IF people knew there was a cure.

ALL CANCER IS CURABLE! The drug companies have been actively suppressing the cures, because curing diseases is not profitable for them. And the media doesn't talk about the cures because of the "Rockefeller Medical Monopoly" and The Trilateral Commission.

Let me explain: The Trilateral Commission is an alliance between 99% of the corporate media in the world, and one of the founders of The Trilateral Commission is a guy named David Rockefeller. Meanwhile, it was a member of the Rockefeller family who originally started selling chemotherapy and radiation therapy to hospitals. And foundations that are run by the Rockefeller family provide much of the funding for medical schools.

Almost immediately after a Rockefeller started selling Chemotherapy and Radiation to hospitals, peer-reviewed scientific papers begun to be published which showed that other methods of treating cancer are more effective than chemo and radiation. But those other methods weren't as profitable for the Rockefeller family as chemo and radiation, so the Rockefeller family used their vast wealth, and their media dominance, to suppress information about the other, cheaper treatments, which are less profitable for the Rockefeller big-wigs.